Research productivity of agricultural scientists: Evidences from high performing and low performing institutes
473 / 39
Keywords:
Agricultural scientists, High performing institute, Low performing institute, Research productivityAbstract
The ever growing concern over enhancing research effectiveness of the public agricultural research system of the country has entailed the crucial need for assessing current status of research productivity. The sample of the study comprised of randomly drawn two hundred agricultural scientists across strata from a high performing and a low performing agricultural institute of India. A research productivity index was developed to measure productivity of respondents under study. The statistical analysis was based upon self-reported data by the scientists under different productivity parameters. The study revealed that there is ample scope of enhancing research productivity among the scientists as the majority (63.5%) of scientists had low to very low level of productivity. In the low performing institute, only 5% of the scientists had higher level of productivity. Even in the high performing institute, only 28% of the scientists had high to very high level of productivity. The findings of the study further indicated the crucial need for revisiting the present system of career advancement for Principal Scientists as the results of a t-test failed to produce a significant value of productivity difference between the Principal Scientists and Senior Scientists. Balanced involvement of the scientists from the low performing institute in research and teaching activities, organization development interventions in regular intervals for ensuring a pro-research and creative organizational environment and allocation of sufficient fund for individual research projects may be suggested among the necessary measures for harnessing optimum research productivity of scientists.Downloads
References
Altmann J, Abbasi A and Hwang J. 2009. Evaluating the productivity of researchers and their communities: the RPIndex and the CP-Index. International Journal of Computer Science and Applications 6 (2): 104–18.
Anon. 2009. Ranking of Indian Universities: An Education Times- Gfk-mode study. Education Times, Times of India, March 30, 2.
Chand R, Kumar P and Kumar S. 2012.Total factor productivity and returns to public investment on agricultural research in India. Agricultural Economics Research Review 25 (2): 181– 94.
Egghe L. 2006. Theory and practice of the g-index. Scientometrics 69 (1): 131–52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0144-7
Gupta B M. 2011. Ranking of Indian institutions in agriculture and allied sciences for their research output during 1999-2008. Annals of Library and Information Studies 58: 63–70. Herzberg F. 1968. One more time: how do you motivate employees. Harvard Business Review 46 (1): 53–62.
Hirsch J E. 2005. An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 102 (46): 16 569–72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102
Jauch L R and Glueck W F. 1975. Evaluation of university professors’ research performance. Management Science 22 (1): 66–75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.22.1.66
Jha AK, Pal S and Joshi P K. 2004. Efficiency of public-funded crop science research in India. Agricultural Economics Research Review 17: 17–27.
Jin B H. 2007. The AR-index: complementing the h-index. ISSI Newsletter 3 (1): 6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11434-007-0145-9
Knorr K D and Mittermeir M. 1980. Publication productivity and professional position: cross national evidence on the role of organizations. Scientometrics 2 (2): 95–120. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02279362
Kumar S, Garg K C and Dutt B. 2009.Indian scientific output as seen through Indian Science Abstracts. Annals of Library and Information Studies 56: 163–8.
Lotka A J. 1926. The frequency distribution of scientific productivity. Journal of Washington Academy of Sciences 16: 317–23.
Maske K, Durden G and Gaynor P E. 2003. Determinants of scholarly productivity among male and female economists. Economic Inquiry 41(4): 555–64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ei/cbg027
Mehta N. 2005. Measuring organizational scientific productivity: a study at NCL. Current Science 88 (2): 223–30.
Mitchell J E and Rebne D S. 1995.The nonlinear effects of teaching and consulting on academic research productivity. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 29 (1): 47–57. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-0121(95)98606-V
Narin F and Breitzman A. 1995. Inventive productivity. Research Policy 24(4): 507–19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(94)00780-2
Pal S, Mathur P and Jha A K. 2005. Impact of agricultural research in India: Is it decelerating. Policy Paper 22, NCAP, New Delhi.
Downloads
Submitted
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2015 The Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The copyright of the articles published in The Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences is vested with the Indian Council of Agricultural Research, which reserves the right to enter into any agreement with any organization in India or abroad, for reprography, photocopying, storage and dissemination of information. The Council has no objection to using the material, provided the information is not being utilized for commercial purposes and wherever the information is being used, proper credit is given to ICAR.